I hope he's suspended for no other reason than that I'll have the chance to rub it in the faces of the self-righteous Brewers fans who had the nerve to give him a standing ovation when his initial link to performance enhancing drugs was uncovered.

Who are you calling self-righteous? Not this one, I always thought he used.

__________________The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.

I'm not really sure what points he's trying to make, but then again I may just be having a slow day. That MLB shouldn't try to make its case by flipping a sleazebag witness? Guess what, that's how a case is usually made. That MLB should instead try "working with the union" to get players on board with spilling their guts? Really, the union that resisted drug testing for years? You expect them to now deviate from the comprehensive testing and penalty program that was only recently put in place? The players who lie through their ****ing teeth and deny any involvement with banned substances even in the face of positive tests? You expect them to start issuing mea culpas?

I know that Bud Selig is a convenient punching bag, but I don't know how anyone can in good conscience point to MLB as the ones doing something wrong in this mess.

Bud Selig and MLB, by their lack of substantive action against PEDs, are doing something wrong by being passively complicit.

In prior years, yes. No question about it. But what "lack of substantive action against PEDs" can you point to now? MLB has the toughest drug testing policy of all the professional sports leagues, one that was widely praised by WADA. For chrissakes, starting next fall they will be randomly drawing blood to test the players for HGH use.

ESPN.com now reporting that the guy who is now a witness for MLB tried to get money from A-Rod for his legal fees before he agreed to co operate.

A-Rod reportedly said no and that's when he decided to testify.

Sounds like the Spira / Steinbrenner extorsion situation from the late 80's /early 90's.

Lip

It would seem to me, they have to have more than just this guy's testimony. They know it will be taken with a grain of salt.First off, this story is a black eye to the game, just coming out.
Secondly, if they wind up not having the material to actually suspend these guys, it will all be for naught, they will look like fools and it still will appear everyone is cheating. They would be far better off just making this go away quietly.

Of course that is just what makes most sense to me. Whether it makes sense to MLB is beyond me.

It would seem to me, they have to have more than just this guy's testimony. They know it will be taken with a grain of salt.First off, this story is a black eye to the game, just coming out.
Secondly, if they wind up not having the material to actually suspend these guys, it will all be for naught, they will look like fools and it still will appear everyone is cheating. They would be far better off just making this go away quietly.

Of course that is just what makes most sense to me. Whether it makes sense to MLB is beyond me.

Since this is essentially an internal matter within baseball and the union, do the same rules and legal doctrines apply? I know that there are rules that are spelt out in the CB but just because these charges may or may not hold up in a courtroom doesn't mean that MLB has a foot to stand on here. They would only have to prove that they can suspend these players under the criteria of the collective bargining agreement, no?

I'm not really sure what points he's trying to make, but then again I may just be having a slow day. That MLB shouldn't try to make its case by flipping a sleazebag witness? Guess what, that's how a case is usually made. That MLB should instead try "working with the union" to get players on board with spilling their guts? Really, the union that resisted drug testing for years? You expect them to now deviate from the comprehensive testing and penalty program that was only recently put in place? The players who lie through their ****ing teeth and deny any involvement with banned substances even in the face of positive tests? You expect them to start issuing mea culpas?

I know that Bud Selig is a convenient punching bag, but I don't know how anyone can in good conscience point to MLB as the ones doing something wrong in this mess.

You've covered reality here that the op-ed ignores. One of the risks of associating with others in illegal activity either through conspiracy or business transactions is that you are dealing with people who may turn over on you as a way to mitigate their own consequences. It's sleazy business done involving sleazy people. And, really, it isn't like the potential suspended players here are linked exclusively through the testimony.

Meanwhile, the criticism against Selig and baseball is for looking to take action, coming from some of the same critics who have asserted that baseball has been complicit in allowing players to enhance their performance with drugs. On one hand, baseball is doing nothing because everyone seems to know some players have been in violation despite the lack of more positive drug tests and on the other baseball is wrong to be railroading players on the word of a disreputable witness. Work with the Union and you are being accused of being complicit with drug-using players, who are represented by the Union.

I think this case shows baseball is trying to clean up the game, and the nature of the case shows how difficult it has been for baseball to clean up the game.

The numbers do not and never have told baseball and the public that players were using performance-enhancing drugs, although Henry Aaron said there is no way anyone could have broken the Ruth/Maris season records while playing clean. Fans want to see great achievements and they want to believe that the achievements are clean. Lacking evidence other than the achievements themselves, they will believe the achievements are clean. Ted Williams, the only .400 hitter to be shot down in an A-4 over Korea and flirt with hitting .400 again at age 38 after returning to the U.S., was clean. I would like to think Frank Thomas, who matched Williams' career home run total, was clean and have no reason to think otherwise. We all know the guy from Oakland who beat him out for the 2000 MVP one year wasn't.

Looking at the big picture, I think Bud Selig deserves credit for trying to clean up the game.

You've covered reality here that the op-ed ignores. One of the risks of associating with others in illegal activity either through conspiracy or business transactions is that you are dealing with people who may turn over on you as a way to mitigate their own consequences. It's sleazy business done involving sleazy people. And, really, it isn't like the potential suspended players here are linked exclusively through the testimony.

Meanwhile, the criticism against Selig and baseball is for looking to take action, coming from some of the same critics who have asserted that baseball has been complicit in allowing players to enhance their performance with drugs. On one hand, baseball is doing nothing because everyone seems to know some players have been in violation despite the lack of more positive drug tests and on the other baseball is wrong to be railroading players on the word of a disreputable witness. Work with the Union and you are being accused of being complicit with drug-using players, who are represented by the Union.

I think this case shows baseball is trying to clean up the game, and the nature of the case shows how difficult it has been for baseball to clean up the game.

The numbers do not and never have told baseball and the public that players were using performance-enhancing drugs, although Henry Aaron said there is no way anyone could have broken the Ruth/Maris season records while playing clean. Fans want to see great achievements and they want to believe that the achievements are clean. Lacking evidence other than the achievements themselves, they will believe the achievements are clean. Ted Williams, the only .400 hitter to be shot down in an A-4 over Korea and flirt with hitting .400 again at age 38 after returning to the U.S., was clean. I would like to think Frank Thomas, who matched Williams' career home run total, was clean and have no reason to think otherwise. We all know the guy from Oakland who beat him out for the 2000 MVP one year wasn't.

Looking at the big picture, I think Bud Selig deserves credit for trying to clean up the game.

He waited until he was dragged in front of Congress before taking any action and then the action that he took was so toothless that Congress had to threaten to revoke baseball's anti-trust exemption, THEN he started getting "serious" about cleaning up the game. He could have tried to take steps to clean up the game long before any records were broken. He didn't want to. Nobody wanted to, everyone was making money, records be damned.

He waited until he was dragged in front of Congress before taking any action and then the action that he took was so toothless that Congress had to threaten to revoke baseball's anti-trust exemption, THEN he started getting "serious" about cleaning up the game. He could have tried to take steps to clean up the game long before any records were broken. He didn't want to. Nobody wanted to, everyone was making money, records be damned.

Anyone who buys that reasoning has no basis to criticize the case at hand.

Since this is essentially an internal matter within baseball and the union, do the same rules and legal doctrines apply? I know that there are rules that are spelt out in the CB but just because these charges may or may not hold up in a courtroom doesn't mean that MLB has a foot to stand on here. They would only have to prove that they can suspend these players under the criteria of the collective bargining agreement, no?

I really don't know, but like the Braun case,I would imagine it probably will eventually wind up with an arbitrator, and if he rules in the players' favor, this becomes a black eye that was silly to take. I have to think they have more than just this one guy whose testimony could easily cause doubt as to it being truthful, and some records from his company.